According to The New York Daily News (April 15)The people at Fox plan to "reveal how something like that can be done". On May 15 a masked magician will show the tricks Blaine used to survive in a 6 ton ice cube for more than 61 hours. "It's well known within the magic community how that stunt was pulled off" said a Fox source. Who from the magic community told Fox that his plastic back harness was able to take heat from an infarred light? (A light that conducts no heat, but yet still provides enough illuminance for TV cameras.) I thought that harness was hidden pretty well in the story, it only recieved 2 seconds of air time, that whole week. Boy, those Fox people have done it again.

Ah yes, infrared light. I use it all the time, e.g., in the Ambitious Card, to secretly heat up the buried card and cause it to rise to the top of the pack. Now that the Masked Magician is blowing the lid off infrared, I may actually have to learn some sleight of hand.

Originally posted by MaxNY: an infarred light? (A light that conducts no heat, but yet still provides enough illuminance for TV cameras.)

Baloney. An infrared light is the kind of thing they use to keep the food warm at the serving station in a restaurant. It gives off a dim, very red light, impossible for a TV camera to use. Infrared cameras, on the other hand, are used to photograph objects with the resultant image distorted (brightest areas are the wamest areas). You might have seen this sort of thing on TV when they show the effects of smoking a cigarette (decreased blood circuation at the expfremeties of the body). The image from this sort of amera wold have been instantly noticeable on TV. An infrared lamp that was strong enough to photograph by, besides the unnatural red color of the image, would also melt a huge hole in the ice!

Most remote location cameras use halogen lights. The Blaine stant was performed in the indoor/outdoor studio ABC has on Broadway, with regular studio lights augmented with other normal lights on stands. (I was there.)

It is possible that a dark shirt (harness) would absorb some heat, but if this is the "exposure" FOX is planning, lotsa luck. Of course, they did expose many of Blaine's tricks in another "Masked" special which, if memory serves, got dismal ratings.

Why couldn't there have been regular television lights for visible-spectrum illumination plus infrared-only lights to keep Blaine comfortable? Infrared light itself is invisible and can be generated without the additional red-spectrum light we see with heat lamps. Also, are you certain that water ice isn't transparent to infrared the way it is to visible light? If it is, then the explanation is plausible: the heat would be transmitted through the ice without being absorbed by it, except via convection in Blaine's immediate vicinity.

I just love how the Fox Network just loves to try and rain on magicians' parades in general: they're scheduling their Masked Magician special about a week and a half before Blaine's special is supposed to air. It will be interesting to see how they "expose" him without giving him more publicity. In other words, without "naming" him.

Last week I was in NYC tagging along on my wife's business trip and saw a crowd on the corner of 42nd and Fifth Avenue, right next to the library. I walk over, thinking that I'm going to see somebody tossing three-card monte, and then I see the TV cameras. It was Blaine doing card tricks for a paraplegic woman in a motorized wheelchair.

Say what you will about his monosyllabic delivery, generally morose persona or his cultivation of messianic affectations (standing with his arms out a la crucifixion while spraying cards from his hands), the man can actually do a pretty damned good stud-double lift.

For those who might be interested, he also has put in the work on learning a memorized deck stack. Except he can, of course, do things that none of the rest have the luxury of doing, like resetting right in front of his audience, knowing that it will be edited out by his TV cameras.

He'd have someone name a card, and then he'd tell them "cut off about two-thirds of the deck.." Then he'd classic force the card at the spot he knew the card would be. And then he'd do an Ambitious Card routine with the card ... and then reset the deck, right in front of everyone while they carried on with the "how'd he do dat...?"

After I wormed my way back out of the crowd (I was standing, at one point, right behind the woman's wheelchair, smack in the middle of the TV shot), a lady came up to me and had me sign a release for the TV show. She said it was going to air at the end of May, likely the 30th.

So now you know what you're going to be asked by laymen after the show airs...

s far as FOX airing the method goes...well, sadly, whether or not it's the actual method (assuming there was a trick to it) Blaine used, the audience is going to believe that is how it was done. So no matter how hard you work at coming up with a newer or better method to freeze yourself everyone will assume you are just using infrared light to keep warm. Maybe you're just a little better at hiding it.

ps David Blaine fooled the pants of me with a mind reading card trick. He might be dull to many magicians, but he is actually pretty darn captivating one-on-one. ;)

What are you basing his "dullness" on? The spectators on his specials? The viewers that not only watched his original special, but gave him enough ratings for two more specials (and now it seems another)? The people that stood on line to see him when he was buried in an NYC sidealk or when he was standing in the block of ice?

My cousin -- who also lives in Hoboken, Jim -- was treated to a personal magic show from Blaine when she sat next to him on a flight. (He told her some creepy stuff about how he has extra blood vessels in his hands that enable him to do his miracles.) She's a die-hard devotee, and that's that. She can't understand my dismissal of him as just an OK street magician. She doesn't care when I tell her that I've seen countermen at Tannen's with more talent.

I can delight her with my own magic, but I can see in her eyes that I'm just the prestidigitational equivalent of a rebound lover.

The ascent to stardom is not always strictly Darwinian. There are worse tragedies.

As I posted in the other thread (about Blaine's DVD/video release), Blaine's name is the only name I ever hear from lay audiences. (Well, very occasionally Copperfield, but I mean rarely.)

Blaine's specials (the first two much more than the third, icey, one) made an enormous impression on lay people from all walks of life.

The guy who runs the coin shop where I get junk silver dollars...all the kids at the high school where I teach...business people who eat in the nice Italian place where I magish...people in the sports bar who wear their workshirts to drink...they ALL know David Blaine.

And I'm sorry to tell all you magicians who find him "dull" that I NEVER hear laypeople refer to him that way. The closest thing to a negative comment I have heard from a lay audience member in the past four years was last week, when one woman said, "I don't know--he's scary--he's just TOO good."

Martin, I've heard the word "dull" from magicians, but never from non-magicians.

As I said in the other thread, it's a bit surprising to me that a couple of TV specials could make such a strong reputation.

But it's even more surprising that so many magicians resent him and his following as much as they do.

Magicians can blast David Blaine all they want, they can call him names, they can pan what he does but the simple fact is that Blaine is the one on television, not them and since he is doing 'real world" magic and not breakthrough techniques (which is most likely why) it sounds more like "sour grapes" than anything else.

Blaines doing the television specials and pulling in the ratings and making $$$$. In the eyes of laypeople, once you are on television, you've made it and in the real world, that's what counts.

I can understand David Blaine's TV appeal -- and he is getting better -- but, I find him dull (I have extra blood vessels in my artistic taste buds that allow for instant and incredibly accurate assessments).

I've rationalized his success this way --

I enter the jungle with my guitar and meet a primitive tribe who've never seen a guitar or a guitar player. I give them a rendition of the "Smoke On The Water" intro. They think I'm a God.

Until the good guys get on TV, Blaine's rep will remain. He's going to be a hard guy to compete with because, being the clever promoter her is, he hired a big public relations firm long before anyone knew who he was.

Of course, if someone wanted to take a shot at Blaine, here's how you'd do it:

It's realy simple, guys. It ain't about magic. It's about sex appeal and appearance. Same with recordings these days - it ain't the music. Same with acting - it ain't the talent, it's the sex appeal and appearance. Sometimes, if you're lucky enough to be blessed with the beauty genes AND are talented, then you have something special. But usually it's appearance over ability every time. So there. Asrah.

I think the magic community misses the point. Its not about whether David Blaine is creative or even talented. In fact any person, even a non magician can be substituted in for him. The show is about magic and David happens to be the person doing it. People remeber the effect and David Blaine and as time goes by, just David Blaine.

The Fox specials only help magic. Most people wont see the show and people who watch wont remeber the methods at all. You only need to worry if you suck and screw up yourself. People tend to remember that more than a tv special.

Wait,Wait,Wait. I did not want anyone to think that Fox's explanation was this backpack heat charged plastic, sorry if it came out that way... Blaine's sucess came out of people's boredom of the heavy box, and smoke tricks. Remember that this is the first guy NOT to air the typical "Everything you see tonight will be performed with no camera trickery..." disclaimer, than use camera trickery. I think his (turn the camera around) was a responce to the Jerry Springer syndrome. I also believe that he created his own stunt, in order to win a million dollars, better odds than Survivor. I will also agree that lay people want more of this guy. He has put the mystery back into magic, without the big box spinners. He is very animated, his shows are edited by to hippest NYC editors, ( I am an editor, and take my word, they are smooth). The ladys dig him, you should have seen the super models calling his name over the Buried Alive stunt. As a friend of mine said... Guess what number I am thinking of, and you couldn't show me any magic card trick that would top that. The odds on you guessing an object or number that I am thinking about... far to great to comprehend, the subjects mind just breaks down, in this case the 6 million viewers. Throw in some Tatoos, you've got a STAR!

My friend Bob Farmer's comments notwithstanding (remember, he's the fellow who wrote the movie "Freakshow"), David Blaine achieved fame by entertaining celebrities (Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert DiNiro, Fiona Apple among them) at parties and had a story written about him in the New York Observer (a weekly) a couple of years before the first ABC special.

Boring? Not to the movie star set. And not to me. I wrote about this (in Genii, no less) and I stand by my words.

This is not sour grapes....could the "appeal" of David Blaine be compared to the "appeal" of the "reality" shows? TV has really become the "Boob" Tube. Mindless drivel that is lapped up by a brain dead audience. I actually root for the crocodile on the nature shows just hoping they finish off whatever moron is messing with them. Supposed "comedies" (used extremely loosely) that rely on idiot humor. Give me the Carol Burnett show, MASH, Red Skelton, etc. that actually entertained.

Call television what you like--"consensual hallucination," "boob tube," "post-modern window-to-the-world"--but at the same time Blaine appeared on the scene, something stupendously ironic occurred on television. In a medium notorious for distortion, spin, artificiality, and every kind of simulacrum, the odd notion of presenting "reality" (with a capital R)on television was becoming the New New Thing. Tabloid talk shows ushered in the other so-called "reality shows" such as the Survivor Series. Now we have the Osbournes on MTV, which is a far cry from the days of Ozzie and Harriet...(although the saga of the Loud Family was a precursor of sorts.)

Vidiots now want to see supposed Reality. This environment is ready-made for Blaine. Unlike EVERY MAGICIAN who has appeared on television since its inception, David Blaine is the only one who seems to be the Real Deal. It's as though he is performing authentic feats of mystery and intrigue--real magic. And viewers believe that what he is doing is REAL...or at least they are willing to suspend their disbelief to a greater extent. They also believe that the spectators (proxies?) who are reacting (on his shows) are equally REAL and their responses are vitally and convincingly REAL. This is what provides the undeniable power of his television specials and life endurance stunts.

If he could have completely concealed his origins and past, he could have successfully passed himself off as a Man Who Fell To Earth or a legitimate Man Facing Southwest...a man NOT from Here, but from another galaxy...K-PAX-style...

If this had happened, debunkers, skeptics, and naysayers could scream to the heavens and offer proofs to the contrary, but the ratings would soar...and Blaine's celebrity would surpass any super star of today.

Even lay people who are somewhat skeptical of what they see, WANT TO BELIEVE...

I suspect that if you froze a watermellon in an eight foot block of ice, there would be a lot of people who would stop and look at it - and David Blaine has got to be at least twice as interesting as that! Just because you're on t.v. doesn't mean that you're not dull. Have you watched a lot of t.v. lately?! I think Blaine deserves all the fame and fortune that he can muster. I wish that I could do as well. What is a shame however, is the amount of money and notoriety bestowed upon such people as Darva Conger, Paula Jones, the Naked Fat Gay Guy from Survivor, etc. - each of whom are better known than David Blaine. Do they deserve to be rich and famous? After all, I bet none of them could do the cigarette through quarter half as good as Blaine does it!

With all respect to Erdnase2000, there is no way that Darva Conger or the naked fat guy from Survivor (whose name you do not know) has a Q rating anywhere near David Blaine.

There is so much that can be learned from David Blaine's success.

He gets a fantastic response from the people he performs for. His specials get great ratings and are talked about across the country and around the world.

He must be doing something right.

You can believe that you are a better magician than he is, if it makes you feel better. But you have to admit that he's better at something than you are, even if you have no idea what it is.

Jon Racherbaumer and I have both written in the past on one aspect of Blaine's unique identity: he presents his magic as though it were real. Can you think of another non-mentalist (counting Uri Geller et al as Mentalists) who takes this premise?

Because DB presents his effects this way, he absolutely can not have a show in a theater. By definition, when you go to a theater to see a magician, you know he's not doing real magic. But some guy on the street, who just stops you and then levitates off the ground -- well, he just might actually be doing it.

I find it an interesting exercise to consider the premises of the Too Perfect Theory in light of David's performances. His audiences definitely believe in magic.

I think most magicians owe Blaine a "Thank you". Now when we approach people in a walk around situation, its not as strange as it was before, to them. They've seen this approach. And chances are, they now WELCOME the opportunity to see magic up close. All of a sudden, we're not as intrusive. Also, he has educated the public in that its OKAY to react strongly to magic. Jon said, people "want to believe". Yes. And they also want to "get into" the magic as much as the people on tv do. I knew any news about Blaine would spark this stream of opinions. That's mine.

John Blaze makes an excellent point. Workers should consider wearing a badge that says, "Hello, my name is DAVID BLAINE." This will cause even more interest:

1. People who remember what David Blaine looks like will point you are not David Blaine. You then prove thewm wrong by doing all his tricks (or better ones if you don't want to wear out your Royal Magic set props).

2. People who don't remember what Blaine looks like, will be really impressed that they've met him personally.

I think that Blaine's "appeal" works in certain markets. Here in Frankfort, if you mention his name, people have no clue who he is. Copperfield is another matter. They know his name. Again, it depends on where you are as to who remembers.

I enjoyed Blaine's 1st special in that it was fresh air compared to most TV magic. The block of ice stunt, his 2nd(?), was a magic re-hash of the 1st special with a geek stunt thrown in at the end to keep interest. No matter if you are standing in a block of ice, swallowing swords, pole sitting, hammering nails into your skull, etc. it falls in the realm of geek stunts.

Blaine is smart in one aspect, he isn't constantly in the publics face. So when he does appear on TV, people will want to tune in. Real test is the longevity of his career. Or if it turns into the typical "bubble gum for the eyes" here today gone tomorrow. Hopefully Blaine is as wise to have a good investment planner for his money.

Originally posted by Pete McCabe:His audiences definitely believe in magic.

How many magicians want audiences that "definitely believe in magic"? Isn't that just a little, well, like a snake oil salesman? Isn't part of the implied contract that most magicians want to have with their audiences "I'm perfectly willing to lie to you, and you're perfectly willing to accept my lie, but we both know (intellectually) that it's just make believe." Who really wants their audiences to walk away really believing that the rope was restored, the card jumped to the top SIX times, the copper changed to silver?

I don't enjoy David Blaine's magic. This makes me suspect that I wouldn't have enjoyed Houdini's act either. Yet Houdini is, from my perch up here in futurity, wonderful to contemplate. In retrospect he looks like a missionary in the church of human liberty, travelling the world with his message of emancipation, spelled out in a language that everyone can easily comprehend.

So, who knows? Maybe Blaine's got something mythic and profound going that we can't see, but that will be perfectly clear to our magical posterity.

Originally posted by Pete McCabe:His audiences definitely believe in magic.

Pete,I agree with most everything you've written except that. I doubt very much that (that the majority of) Blaine's audiences believe he is doing real magic. Some may believe he is reading their minds...

People act differently, and more dramatically, when in the presence of a television camera. Anthropologists know that the presence of an observer alters what is observed. How can an observer who is making a record of the event not affect those who are being filmed? People laugh louder in movie theater than they do in their family room. The presence and number of others present makes for a more intense emotional experience.

---

Recently a comedian did a bit for Leno where he went around asking people if they were voting in the upcoming (non-existent) election and if they would vote for him and say a few words for his commercials. He had no problem finding people who would say what he asked them to in order to get on TV.

The presence of a television camera seems to be a greater behavior dis-inhibiter than alcohol.

All this, plus selective editing, adds up to the impression created by the publicly visible response to Blaine's work.

---

What I think we need to remember is that our evaluation of Mr. Blaine, based on his public persona, is one of limited insight. We don't know him and simply having knowledge of his methods doesn't provide any more meaningful insight into his thought process than sitting next to him on an airplane does.

When people talk to me about Copperfield they ask "How did he do that?" knowing it is a load of hoakum.

When people first started talking about Blaine they said, "He really does that stuff...for real, it's scary."

Now I'm not certain he has kept the interest at the same level over the few years since show #1, but here is the deal.

What he presented had a deeper emotional impact for these "for real" people. He opened a door for all magical performers to seek conviction in the way mentalists do. You can walk through that door, OR you can watch it (and sadly, in some cases even help it) close again.

There is so much that magic can do on the other side of that door where it has emotional meaning for people. A place where magical performances engage imagination and emotion rather than passively amusing. Blaine opened that door, though I'm not certain he has even walked through it yet.

When the door closes you will know where to find me. Knock loudly.

Something to ponder. Why is it a mentalist is right at home being believed in a theater but a magician comes with caveat baggage? I suppose that requires its own thread.

Pete, I'm not sure what a Q rating is, but I would bet you $20 that the name Darva Conger is generally better known than that of David Blaine. You say "he gets a fantastic response from the people he performs for". Of course he does ... if he didn't, we wouldn't see that, now would we. The reasoning behind your belief that "he absolutly could not have a show in a theater" doesn't make sense. Do his fans only believe that his magic is real, when it's done outside? I guess if you stick a cigarette through a quarter while indoors, it just somehow doesn't seem real anymore?! I do agree that his brand of magic would not go over well, in a live venue, where people actually paid for their tickets, but not for the reason you suggest. Yes Pete, I will "have to admit that he is better at something than I am". Of course this is a universal statement. I mean, everyone on earth is better at something than I am - I don't see how it could be any other way! I was not really knocking Blaine quite as much as you seem to believe. I think he is very adept at attaining more than his fair share of fame and fortune, and will probably continue to do so. I think that's great. As I said, I wish I could do as well. I also believe, that if he can come up with a even better way, he will drop the magic tricks in a heartbeat. If I'm not mistaken, the ratings for his 3rd special were less than for his 2nd, which were less than for his 1st. You see the trend? David Blaine has been great for magic. It's hard to argue against that (though some will). I hope he continues with his sucsesses. He just isn't quite my cup of tea. And buy the way, the Naked Fat Guy on Survivor was Richard Hatch ... I get all my magic books from him! ;)

Maybe the badge should read "I think I'm better than david Blaine" :-)

A Q Rating (my bad, it's actually called a Q Score) is a measure of how many people have heard of your name, and if their impression is favorable or unfavorable. (There may be more, but this is the gist of it.) You can find out more at qscores.com , but actual numbers will cost you money, so we'll never know if Darva Conger or David Blaine score higher.

Erdnase2000: I did not intend my entire post at you; sorry it seemed that way because it began with a comment directed at you.

Specifically, my comment that "he must be better at something that you are" was not directed at you.

It was directed at the many people who say that Blaine is a worse magician than they are, and worse at presenting magic, and whatever else insult they can think of, and they don't ever seem to acknowledge that he must be damned good at something to get where he is.

My point is, maybe it's worth trying to figure out what that thing is. Because it does seem to be very important in performing magic effectively for lay audiences.

Just a note about performing in or out of a theater. If you stand on a stage, it strongly suggests that you are "staging" something; that what you are doing is a form of entertaining make-believe.

Houdini obviously did things on and off stages during his career. However, he seems to be remembered for the mythic performances he gave off stage? I think that most people associate Houdini or imagine him hanging upside down in a straightjacket, OUTSIDE, connected to a crane or building...or...outside in a packing crate, about to be dumped in a river...or in a jail, almost naked...or submerged in a coffin under water in a swimming pool...or...

Who remembers him onstage performing anything? (Thanks to Tony Curtis, audience probably remember the Water Torture Escape, but it was all the outdoor performances that captured the imaginations of the public.)

Who remembers him pulling flowers from a cone or making a billiard ball multiply...?

In responce to Terry Terrell's "Geek trick"... I believe the stunts he performs at the end of each special would be too easliy classified either as publicity stunts, or geek stunts. I work in Times Square, and last year as I walked by this man who Froze himself silly, I really pondered exactly what it was that made thousands stop and stare. It wasn't until I got upstairs in my building, ran my damn punchcard through that horrible slot, and heard the timeclock kick in my name... that I realized; the "slow torture" aspect of his stunts could make everyone stop,stare, and say "Yeah, I would take a couple of wet drips on my forehead over my job anyday. Also, from what he has said in Lisbon, and Las Vegas, I don't think he is rich. I believe he has spent most of his money. He did recieve a nice advance (I hope) from his book, but that was two years ago... still no book. A million or two can buy you a nice sized place in NYC, but that Ice stunt must have set him back a half million or more. What do you think he spent just to insure a stunt like that? I believe he said he shots till the money runs out. That is a lot of shooting, especially if you have to shoot and shoot and shoot until you actually guess the object in the spectator's hand.

I treat a living room full of people to a half hour of solid, entertainingly presented close-up magic. They are thrilled and delighted. I finish and acknowledge the applause. I mentally count to three, and then someone asks...someone ALWAYS asks:

DID YOU EVER SEE THAT GUY, DAVID BLAINE???

I would forgive David Blaine EVERYTHING, I would begrudge him NOTHING, if he could only make those people stop asking that question!!

People dont really know what to say after you have successfully performed magic for them. Usually they have never seen good close up magic live before will relate other stories they have about magic. People simply ask me about him usually is a sign of a compliment because they have been fooled and they want to find out if I know him. People become defensive to good magic and they tell me Blaine is better than me because he can float 6 feet in the air and I cant repeat it. In the end I dont really pay it much attention to it. Of course Copperfield, Penn & Teller and the masked magician have been mentioned to me as well usually each gets mentioned at a time when any of these performers have recently been on tv. After watching Steve Cohen perform his show Chamber Magic, one female audience member proclaimed she thought it was wrong for the "Masked Magician" to give secrets away. This was her way of complimenting Steve because it was such a good performance. Its ironic in the sense that Steve just happens to have been a consultant for the David Blaine show.